bridgetalk.com forums :: Laws & Rulings

John_M,UK

Resurrecting a Hand ( 15:32:49 FriFeb 28 2003 )

Country: England

I have spoken to several members of my County association and the EBU and none of the have given me a satisfactory answer to my "straightforward questions, lol.

What I want to know is under what laws do you justify resurrecting a hand after a match (please assume that it falls within the correction period) that was not subject to any appeal or ruling during the match?

I keep being pointed towards laws that ultimately refer to corrections of "compuation and tabulation", which in my days of going to school meant adding things up and writing things down.

In the hand that I queried the score was agreed at table, the correct score was written down, no appeal or ruling on that hand was claimed or made during the match ~ what laws do you use to appeal a hand such as this after the match?

I was always under the impression that once a result was agreed upon and the correct score for that result was recorded, that the game moved on. And that if a hand was subject to an appeal and/or a ruling then the scores etc. could be revisited by a further appeal. Have I been wrong in this assumption and if so which laws apply (that don't ultimately rely on a correction of an error in "computation or tabulation".

Thanks in advance,

John.

172 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Resurrecting a Hand ( 02:53:59 SatMar 1 2003 )

Country: USA

I'm not at all sure what you mean by "resurrecting a hand". The laws in general allow for a TD ruling on questions of irregularity, and Law 81C6 requires the TD "to rectify an error or irregularity of which he becomes aware in any manner, within the correction period established in accordance with Law�79C". Law 92 establishes a contestant's right to appeal, and specifies that he may do so until 30 minutes after the official score has been made available, unless the Sponsoring Organization specifies a different interval. This is the same correction period specified in Law 79C. Law 93C specifies that a final appeal may be made to the National Authority (in England, the EBU, if I'm not mistaken).

Does this answer your question?

John_M,UK

Re: Resurrecting a Hand ( 10:04:22 SatMar 1 2003 )

Country: England

Hi Ed,
Thanks for the reply.

Regards.

bluejak

427 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Resurrecting a Hand ( 15:19:49 MonMar 3 2003 )

Let us look a little more carefully at Ed's answer.

Quote: Law 92B

The right to request or appeal a Director's ruling expires 30 minutes after the official score has been made available for inspection, unless the sponsoring organisation has specified a different time period.

Note that this includes the words "right to request ... a Director's ruling".

So the Correction periods are in effect four.

One. Scoring, computation, tabulation and so on is covered by Law 79C.

Two. Scoring an event is covered by Law 81C6 and thus Law 79C.

Three. Asking for a ruling is covered by Law 92B.

Four. Appealing a ruling is covered by Law 92B.

All of these default to 30 minutes after the scores are published and made available unless the sponsoring organisation says otherwise.

So, if:

You agree on 2S +1 but put +110 on the score sheet
The EBU scorer enters the score on the wrong side
You decide to ask for a ruling at the end of the session when you realise what declarer really had!
You got a ruling, discuss it with friends at the end who advise you to appeal, so you do

then you are in time to do so within 30 minutes of the scores being published, or whatever time the sponsoring organisation says.

Note that a sponsoring organisation can decide to make the various Correction Periods different lengths. For example, the Merseyside Bridge League says that for rulings the Correction period is 24 hours, but for appeals it is 48 hours. For leagues played privately this seems sensible to me.

Unfortunately most sponsoring organisations do not ever look at what Correction periods should be but then they default to 30 minutes after the scores are published.

---
David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com>
Liverpool, England, UK
http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

John_M,UK

Re: Resurrecting a Hand ( 17:02:25 MonMar 3 2003 )

Country: England

Thanks bluejak for the clarification.

On reflection the crux of my questioning revolves around the "ethical application" of some laws.

I have today submitted an e-mail to Nick Doe and await his response. Maybe you'll get to hear about it,lol (it's full of mistakes)!

Kind regards,

John.

9 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 8 guest(s).
(The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003)
bluejak

Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm.

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from any country in the world, this is the place!Hosted by David StevensonSenior Consultant DirectorEnglish Bridge Union

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union